The European Union Was Always an American-Led Project, and Now Washington Is in Panic Mode

Months before mobs of racist, half literate and very disobedient subjects of the Queen (may God save her) voted to leave the European Union, Barack Obama announced that while he loved the UK very dearly, a successful Brexit vote would be punished with spiteful, protracted trade negotiations.

But the plebes didn't listen.

Now that threats and democracy have failed, John Kerry is stating publicly that there are a number of ways in which last week's non-binding vote -- tantamount to Hitler's burning of the Reichstag -- could be "walked back". Euphemisms are nice little things, but certainly curb-stomping the will of ordinary Europeans is a job best left to Europe's - and not America's - ruling classes?

If you think this you are sadly mistaken. As the Telegraph reminded us in pre-Brexit Apocalypse April:

[D]eclassified documents from the State Department archives [show] that US intelligence funded the European movement secretly for decades, and worked aggressively behind the scenes to push Britain into the project.

As this newspaper first reported when the treasure became available, one memorandum dated July 26, 1950, reveals a campaign to promote a full-fledged European parliament. It is signed by Gen William J Donovan, head of the American wartime Office of Strategic Services, precursor of the Central Intelligence Agency.

The key CIA front was the American Committee for a United Europe (ACUE), chaired by Donovan. Another document shows that it provided 53.5 per cent of the European movement's funds in 1958. The board included Walter Bedell Smith and Allen Dulles, CIA directors in the Fifties, and a caste of ex-OSS officials who moved in and out of the CIA.

The report went on to state that "papers show that [the US] treated some of the EU's 'founding fathers' as hired hands, and actively prevented them finding alternative funding that would have broken reliance on Washington". One particularly unapologetic memo, dated June 11, 1965, "Instructs the vice-president of the European Community to pursue monetary union by stealth, suppressing debate until the 'adoption of such proposals would become virtually inescapable'". Sounds like a raw deal for Europeans who aren't fabulously wealthy international bankers -- until you remember that anyone who opposed the omnipotent, holy European Union is a shameless bigot.

The US has relied upon the EU as the political and economic arm of its permanent military presence in Europe (NATO), and this is why Washington cannot allow the idea of sovereignty to enter the warped little minds of neo-fascists in the UK (or any other European nation) who wish to have control over their own foreign policy.

It is simply not up for debate, and any attempt to reclaim statehood within Europe will simply be "walked back," to borrow John Kerry's purple prose.

It is absolutely beyond our realm of understanding as to why a democratic act -- a non-binding one, no less -- aimed at restoring seemingly basic aspects of statehood such as "who gets to cross our border" and "who we will trade with/sanction/etc." could be characterized as radical or xenophobic.

Washington is now in full panic mode. Cracks are beginning to show in the union it helped forge with not-so-honorable intentions.

Like all unnecessary institutions, the European Union has invested heavily in the creation and continuation of its own self-aggrandizing mythology. Reading the horror and outrage in every newspaper after the Brexit vote was tallied, one would think that the UK had just voted to invade Iraq or elect David Cameron as prime minister. Amazingly, both atrocities took place with the full approval of the press and without a popular vote. Coincidence or fate?

Like it or not, the Eurosceptic movement is gaining momentum. Accusations of racism and ignorance can't compete with simple questions such as "why can't we control our own immigration policy?" or "why do we have to mold our foreign policy to the dictates of faraway, unelected bureaucrats?" Sorry, these aren't radical or extreme questions -- which is why Washington simply cannot allow Brexit to succeed.

We will close with a statement made by UK's justice minister Dominic Raab after Obama issued a stern warning against Brexit in April:

You can't say on the one hand that the US-UK special relationship is as strong as ever and always will be, and in the next breath say 'take my advice or you go to the back of the queue'. I don't think the British people will be blackmailed by anyone

Don't be so sure. With Hillary Clinton queued up to be our next American president -- luckily for her, Donald Trump is quite literally the only human with a pulse who can't beat her in a general election -- Washington's zero tolerance policy for European self-determination is unlikely to change. In fact, 5 euros says it will get much, much worse.

If other European nations begin to mull their own Brexit, expect Obama's threats of protracted trade negotiations to be replaced by Nicaragua-style regime change, compliments of the one and only Hillary Clinton.

And if you don't like it, you're racist.